No. 03-15-00528-CV

In the Third Court of Appeals

Austin, Texas

TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY AND MICHAEL WILLIAMS,

COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY,

Appellants

v.

ACADEMY OF CAREERS AND TECHNOLOGIES, INC. D/B/A

ACADEMY OF CAREERS AND TECHNOLOGIES CHARTER SCHOOL,

Appellee 

ACCELERATED APPEAL FROM CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-15-002879

200TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

APPELLEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS ACCELERATED

APPEAL FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS:

Appellee Academy of Careers and Technologies, Inc. d/b/a Academy of 

Careers and Technologies Charter School files this motion asking the Court to 

dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

1. Appellants are the Texas Education Agency and Michael Williams,

Commissioner of Education (collectively “TEA”). Appellee is the Academy of 

ACCEPTED

03-15-00528-CV

6736273

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

9/1/2015 8:39:23 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/1/2015 8:39:23 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
2

Careers and Technologies, Inc. d/b/a Academy of Careers and Technologies 

Charter School (“ACT”).

2. On August 21, 2015, TEA filed a notice of accelerated appeal to 

challenge an order—purportedly signed the same date—denying its plea to the 

jurisdiction and granting a temporary injunction. See Exhibit A. In a docketing 

statement filed four days later, TEA again claimed to be appealing an order signed 

on August 21, 2015.

3. ACT’s undersigned counsel was not involved in the proceedings 

below. From reviewing the district court’s file and communicating with the trial 

judge’s staff, the undersigned has learned that no order granting a temporary 

injunction or denying a plea to the jurisdiction was signed on August 21, 2015 or 

afterward through the date of this filing.

1 Thus, this appeal is premature. A

prematurely filed notice of appeal has no effect until the appellate deadline is 

triggered and therefore does not vest this Court with jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 25.1(b), 27.1(a).

4. Ordinarily, the Court might allow an appellant time to cure this sort of 

jurisdictional defect. See, e.g., Smith Cnty. v. Popovac, No. 12-11-00329-CV, 2011 

WL 6119266, at *1 (Tex. App.—Tyler Dec. 7, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.)

 1 The appellate record was due on August 31, 2015. Based on these observations, the record is not 

expected to contain the order TEA is purportedly appealing.
3

(dismissing appeal from purported denial of plea to jurisdiction when trial court 

had not yet memorialized its ruling in writing and appellant could not cure defect).

But the Court should not follow that course here. By asserting that appellate 

jurisdiction has attached—incorrectly and perhaps even deliberately so—TEA 

seeks to prevent the trial court from taking any further action while the case is on 

appeal.

2 See Exhibit A at 2 (asserting that alleged temporary injunction is 

automatically stayed while appeal remains pending and that, by virtue of purported 

challenge to denial of its jurisdictional plea, all proceedings before trial court are 

stayed pending resolution of appeal). Compare In re State Bd. For Educator 

Certification, 452 S.W.3d 802, 808-10 (Tex. 2014) (orig. proceeding) (holding that 

governmental entity’s notice of appeal does not deprive trial court of discretion to 

deny supersedeas), with In re Tex. Educ. Agency, 441 S.W.3d 747, 750 (Tex. 

App.—Austin 2014, orig. proceeding [mand. denied]) (holding that district court 

abused discretion by holding hearing and granting charter schools’ motion to deny 

supersedeas after TEA filed notice of appeal and invoked statutory stay that 

attaches when trial court denies plea to jurisdiction). This Court should not allow

TEA to create a perception in the trial court or elsewhere that its premature notice 

of accelerated appeal could have such an effect.

 2 Ironically, if TEA is correct and the proceedings below are already stayed, then the trial court 

arguably lacks the ability to sign the very order TEA has prematurely sought to appeal.
4

CONCLUSION AND PRAYER

Appellee respectfully requests that the Court grant this motion and dismiss 

this appeal for want of jurisdiction. Appellee requests all other appropriate relief to 

which it is entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

SMITH LAW GROUP LLLP

1250 Capital of Texas Highway South

Three Cielo Center, Suite 601

Austin, Texas 78746

(512) 439-3230

(512) 439-3232 (fax)

By: /s/D. Todd Smith

D. Todd Smith

State Bar No. 00797451

todd@appealsplus.com

Counsel for Appellee, Academy of Careers 

and Technologies, Inc. d/b/a Academy of 

Careers and Technologies Charter School

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

In compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.1(a)(5), I certify 

that I attempted to confer with Erika Laremont, lead appellate counsel for

Appellants, but was unable to reach her before filing this motion. Given the relief 

requested, appellee presumes the motion would be opposed.

/s/D. Todd Smith

D. Todd Smith
5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On September 1, 2015, in compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 9.5, I served this document by e-service, e-mail, facsimile, or mail to:

Erika M. Laremont

erika.laremont@texasattorneygeneral.gov

Assistant Attorney General

General Litigation Division

P.O. Box 12548

Austin, Texas 78711-2548

Counsel for Appellant

/s/ D. Todd Smith

D. Todd Smith
CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-15-002879

ACADEMY OF CAREERS AND 

TECHNOLOGIES INC. d/b/a ACADEMY

OF CAREERS AND TECHNOLOGIES

CHARTER SCHOOL

Plaintiff,

v.

TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY and

MICHAEL WILLIAMS in his Official 

Capacity as the Commissioner of Education

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

98th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF ACCELERATED APPEAL AND

NOTICE OF AUTOMATIC STAY

TO THE HONORABLE DISTRICT COURT JUDGE:

Defendants the Texas Education Agency and Michael L. Williams, Commissioner of 

Education, in his Official Capacity, (“Defendants”) file this Notice of Accelerated Appeal of the 

Court’s Order of the 200th District Court of Travis County, the Honorable Gisela D. Triana 

presiding, signed August 21, 2015, in the above-referenced cause of action which denied 

Defendants’ Plea to the Jurisdiction and granted Plaintiff’s temporary injunction. 

Defendants are entitled to this interlocutory appeal pursuant to TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM 

CODE REM. CODE § 51.014(a)(4) and (8), which allows appeal from a district court’s interlocutory 

order granting a temporary injunction or order denying a governmental unit’s plea to the 

jurisdiction.

This appeal involves issues similar to those raised in two other matters involving three 

charter schools—American Youthworks Charter School, Honors Academy, and Azleway Charter 
School —which are currently on appeal in the Court of Appeals for the Third Judicial District, 

Austin, Texas, Nos. 03-14-00283-CV and 03-14-00360-CV.

ACCELERATED APPEAL

Pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(d)(6) and 28.1(a), Defendants give notice that this is an 

accelerated appeal to the Third District Court of Appeals, as it is an appeal of an interlocutory 

order allowed as of right by statute. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE §§ 51.014(a)(4), (8). 

NOTICE OF STAY OF ALL PROCEEDINGS IN TRIAL COURT PENDING 

RESOLUTION OF THIS APPEAL

Defendants invoke TEX. R. APP. P. § 29.1(b) and TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 6.001 

by this Notice of Accelerated Appeal, thereby staying the Order awarding a temporary injunction. 

See Public Utility Com’n of Texas v. Coalition of Cities for Affordable Utility Rates, 776 S.W.2d 

221 (Tex.App.—Austin 1989) rev’d on other grounds by 798 S.W.2d 560 (pendency of an appeal 

from an order granting interlocutory relief suspends order appealed from when appellant not 

required to post bond). In light of Defendants’ denied jurisdictional challenge, they further invoke 

TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014 (b) to stay “all other proceedings in the trial court pending 

resolution” of this appeal of the August 21, 2015 Order.

DEFENDANTS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO POST A COST BOND

Notice is further given that pursuant to TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 6.001,

Defendants are not required to file a bond for court costs. Defendants’ appeal is therefore

perfected upon the filing of the notice of appeal.

2
Respectfully submitted,

KEN PAXTON

Attorney General of Texas

CHARLES E. ROY

First Assistant Attorney General

JAMES E. DAVIS

Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation

ANGELA V. COLMENERO

Division Chief - General Litigation

/s/ Erika M. Laremont

ERIKA M. LAREMONT

State Bar No. 24013003

Assistant Attorney General

General Litigation Division

Post Office Box 12548, Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78711-2548

512-463-2120 (Telephone)

512-320-0667 (Facsimile)

erika.laremont@texasattorneygeneral.gov

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing instrument has been sent via File & 

ServeXpress and electronic mail on this the 21st day of August, 2015, to: 

Ryan Henry

1380 Pantheon Way, Ste 215

San Antonio, TX 78232

Austin, TX 78701

(210) 569-6494 facsimile

/s/ Erika M. Laremont

ERIKA M. LAREMONT

3